Woods v. Kings County Dist. Attorney's Office
| Decision Date | 23 December 1996 |
| Citation | 234 A.D.2d 554,651 N.Y.S.2d 595 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Rufus WOODS, Respondent, v. KINGS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, etc., Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn (Roseann B. MacKechnie and Nancy F. Talcott, of counsel), for appellant.
Before BRACKEN, J.P., and SULLIVAN, ALTMAN and McGINITY, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to compel the production of certain documents pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law (Public Officers Law article 6), the District Attorney, Kings County, appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.), dated July 13, 1995, as directed him to produce criminal history records of certain individuals and other documents claimed to be attorney work product and interagency or intra-agency documents exempt from disclosure.
ORDERED that the order is modified, on the law, by (1) deleting the provision thereof which directed the appellant to provide the criminal history records of certain individuals and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the petition which was to compel disclosure of the criminal history records, (2) adding to the provision thereof which granted that branch of the petition which was to compel disclosure of other documents a clause excluding from disclosure those documents contained at pages numbered 172, 175-178, 181-183, 203-206, 209-211 in the record on appeal, and (3) deleting the provision thereof which provided that telephone numbers and addresses could be redacted from a document entitled "Witness Information" and substituting therefor a provision allowing redaction of all telephone numbers and addresses from any documents produced; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appellant shall provide the specified documents within 30 days after service upon him of a copy of this decision and order, with notice of entry.
Criminal history records or "rap sheets" compiled by the Division of Criminal Justice Services are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Law (see, Public Officers Law § 87[2][b]; Executive Law § 837[8]; 9 NYCRR 6150.4[b][6]; Matter of Bennett v. Girgenti, 226 A.D.2d 792, 640 N.Y.S.2d 307). Contrary to the conclusion reached by the Supreme Court, we did not hold otherwise...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Doe v. Pataki
...to New York's Freedom of Information Law. See N.Y.Pub.Off.Law §§ 84-90 (McKinney 1988); Woods v. Kings County District Attorney's Office, 234 A.D.2d 554, 651 N.Y.S.2d 595, 596 (2d Dep't 1996). However, a court record of a defendant's conviction remains a document available for public inspec......
-
People v. Seeley
...to quash the subpoena, and the court file. Background On or about January 1, 1988 at approximately 11:00 A.M., at 106 Steuben Street in Kings County, the defendant stabbed her boyfriend to death. Defendant was apprehended at the scene of the crime. Defendant gave three oral statements, one ......
-
The Legal Aid Soc'y v. N.Y. Cnty. Dist. Attorney's Office
...under FOIL by virtue of constituting attorneys' work product. The court agrees (see Matter of Woods v Kings County Dist. Attys. Off., 234 A.D.2d 554, 556 [2d Dept 1996]). The United States Supreme Court has held that the phrase "'work product' embraces such items as 'interviews, statements,......
-
Williams v. Erie County Dist. Atty.
...Executive Law § 837[8]; 9 NYCRR 6150.4[b][6]; Matter of Bennett v. Girgenti, 226 A.D.2d 792 )" (Matter of Woods v. Kings County Dist. Attorney's Off., 234 A.D.2d 554, 555, 651 N.Y.S.2d 595). However, the disclosure of criminal history records by a District Attorney is required, provided suc......